St. Thomas Law Review
First Page
244
Document Type
Comment
Abstract
This comment discusses the constitutionality of warrantless DNA collection from arrestees, and proposes an analysis that the Supreme Court should use when deciding on this issue to find that this practice violates the Fourth Amendment. Part II of this comment discusses the general development of DNA collection laws, how the laws have expanded to include persons that have been arrested but not convicted of certain crimes, and the procedures used to collect the DNA samples. In addition, Part II includes a survey of the conflicting decisions by courts across the country and demonstrates the disagreement over the constitutionality of this particular practice. Part II also argues that DNA collection and fingerprinting are not analogous in particular circumstances. Part III summarizes the evolution of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, and how it is shifting back to the trespass interpretation originally used by the courts. Part III also analyzes how the collection of DNA is a search under the Fourth Amendment. In Part IV, this comment discusses how the Supreme Court should handle the issue of warrantless DNA collection from arrestees and proposes that the trespass test used most recently by the Supreme Court in Jones should also be applied to this issue to find that the collection of DNA is a violation of the Fourth Amendment.
Recommended Citation
Angelique Romero,
Implications of United States v. Jones on DNA Collection form Arrestees: Trespass Prohibited by the Fourth Amendment,
25
St. Thomas L. Rev.
244
(2013).
Available at:
https://scholarship.stu.edu/stlr/vol25/iss2/5